Because they do one thing very, VERY well. They are very good at lobbying against increased gun control.

You seem like a smart and savvy consumer, not like most of the rubes here on Fark. How would you like, as part of a very special discount to a limited number of people, to be one of the first to buy a case of my brand new rhiocerous repellant?

JohnCarter:Somehow..when you start your article with "the NRA held it's annual gun nut convention" this sort of highlights the fact that this is not an actual news article or even a TV review but a thinly veiled editorial wherein the writer is not a gun ownership supporter.

It is kinda fun, though, that I've got about half of the people in the thread think I'm a "gun nut" while much of the other half seem to think I want to surgically remove their trigger fingers or something. I really will need more popcorn if this thread keeps up.

smells_like_meat:Yes, this. And the constant demonetization of an entire group of law abiding citizens. "Gun nuts", "small penis", knuckle dragging neanderthals", "Tea baggers", etc., etc. Say that you honestly believe in your anti-gun cause. OK. How do you think that this would be beneficial to your cause?

If people are being killed in incidents that could be prevented by public safety laws and the NRA is preventing public safety laws then the NRA is responsible for people being killed due to the absence of public safety laws.

By gravely restricting or essentially abolishing a basic civil right?

So, just think how many lives we could save if we abolished the 4th amendment. Just have random police searches of houses and cars. Random roadblocks. Arrest people for contraband or warrants. Think how many criminals we could sweep up, how many lives we could save. . .just at the cost of just a little freedom, just one more amendment.

Because they do one thing very, VERY well. They are very good at lobbying against increased gun control.

If I want to oppose attacks on my Second Amendment civil rights, I know the ACLU will take a selective blind spot to that civil right. I, as a private citizen, have very limited ability to influence my legislators. However, together with several million of my fellow Americans, we can and do.

Just because I pay dues to them doesn't mean I vote how they tell me to (at most, I'll listen to recommendations, but I voted Obama because Romney was all-around worse). Just because I pay dues to them doesn't mean I agree with every dumbass thing their spokespeople say.

However, backing them is the best way to thwart anti-gun activists and their legislative pressure, so I pay my dues.

It's a little like having an employee that says dumb shiat at work, is neglectful of hygiene, is rude to his co-workers and generally unpleasant, but he's OUTSTANDING at the actual core task of his job. That is what the NRA is to me, something that is outstanding at it's one core task, even if it has many failings on the side.

Its an absolutist position that probably gets thousands of people unnecessarily killed each year, but at least its an ethos.

Bonkthat_Again:I'm just curious who, the NRA is actually representing?

Just a thought, but they probably think they are representing the millions of people that give them yearly dues. It is an "Association" that people voluntarily pay to be a part of. If they didn't represent those people, then they wouldn't get very much money. (I heard that gun companies only give about 10% of the total NRA funding) I'm not a member but from what I know they started out as a safety organization that helped organize gun competitions. But as more power is concentrated into the hands of fewer politicians they have found that it pays to leverage their money into lobbing. Much like any other political organization.

There, there now ... I'm sure any veterinarian or veterinary assistant will tell you that the NRA isn't TRULY malevolent, it's just frightened - and often a frightened animal will lash out in vicious, almost incomprehensible ways.

What's it frightened of? Well, for starters, it's worried that people who refuse to associate with guns, who refuse to foam at the mouth over the 2nd Amendment, might know something it doesn't know: namely, that rational thought and deliberate planning will keep people out of 90 percent of the scenarios in which the NRA envisions a gun might be necessary.

So, in conclusion, someone just needs to throw a towel over the NRA, scoop it up firmly and love it and scratch it behind the ears and reassure it that nothing bad will happen if people are compelled to give up their mobile rocket launchers and rocket-propelled grenades.